A new species of the genus Oligoryzomys (Rodentia: Cricetidae) from Peru

Abstract

The genus Oligoryzomys is the most speciose genus in the tribe Oryzomyini; however, under the general lineage concept of species, at least nine lineages are pending review and naming. In this study, I carry out qualitative and quantitative morphological analyses of specimens of Oligoryzomys andinus, O. aff. andinus, and O. arenalis, to delimit these three lineages. I show that O. aff. andinus is morphologically distinct both from O. andinus and O. arenalis, corroborating that the lineage merits recognition as a species, as suggested by previously published molecular analyses (Hurtado and D’Elía 2019). I therefore describe O. aff. andinus as a new species endemic to the Polylepis forests on the western slope of the Andes and coastal Lomas in central Peru. Finally, I propose two hypotheses about the biogeographical history of O. andinus, O. arenalis, and this new species.

Pliocene sigmodontine rodents (Mammalia: Cricetidae) in northernmost South America: test of biogeographic hypotheses and revised evolutionary scenarios

“…occidentalis [43], or when Oligoryzomys guille was named and separated from O . andinus [52]. Thus, no molar information is available from these studies that would aid in the distinction of these species of Oligoryzomys .…”

“…Recent systematic revisions in the widespread rodent Oligoryzomys have been conducted mostly based on molecular evidence (see [49] and references therein). Although 22 extant species are recognized as valid [3,[50][51][52], at least 33 independent lineages are considered as integrating the genus according to molecular-based phylogenies [53][54][55]. Most of the recent revisionary efforts focused on Oligoryzomys lack any attempt to provide differences based on molar morphology, even for those species regarded as new.…”

“…Although this significant study surveyed 30 features, including general body, external, and craniodental traits, not a single aspect of molar morphology was included. A similar set of characters, excluding any from dentition, were used when Oligoryzomys pachecoi was described and compared against O. destructor, O. chaparensis and O. f. occidentalis [43], or when Oligoryzomys guille was named and separated from O. andinus [52]. Thus, no molar information is available from these studies that would aid in the distinction of these species of Oligoryzomys.…”

Species limits and recent diversification ofCerradomys(Sigmodontinae: Oryzomyini) during the Pleistocene

“…To assess the monophyly of oryzomyine rodents, Weksler, Percequillo & Voss (2006) , based on morphological and molecular data, described ten new genera for species and species groups formerly referred to as Oryzomys. A combination of different delimitation criteria together with fieldwork and taxonomic revision efforts led to an increase in the number of recognized species and even description of new Oryzomyini genera in the last decade ( Percequillo, Weksler & Costa, 2011 ; Brito et al, 2020 ; Hurtado, 2021 ; Semedo et al, 2021 ), reflecting the high and hide rodent diversity of this group ( Burgin et al, 2018 ; D’Elía, Fabre & Lessa, 2019 ). At present, 30 extant genera compose this tribe ( Pardiñas et al, 2017 ; Brito et al, 2020 ; Percequillo et al, 2021 ).…”

Lista actualizada de la diversidad de los mamíferos del Perú y una propuesta para su actualización

“…Los cambios en esta nueva lista respecto a la anterior (Pacheco et al 2020a) han ocurrido principalmente por el incremento de especies nuevas como el marsupial Marmosa (Micoureus) jansae (Voss et al 2021), los murciélagos Cynomops kuizha (Arenas-Viveros et al 2021) e Histiotus mochica (Velazco et al 2021b) y los roedores Oligoryzomys guille (Hurtado 2021), Oxymycterus willkaurco (Zeballos et al 2021), Thomasomys antoniobracki (Ruelas & Pacheco 2021), Nephelomys ricardopalmai ) y Neacomys aletheia (Semedo et al 2021); así como por los primeros reportes para el Perú de Eumops bonariensis (Ruelas & Soria 2021), Platyrrhinus fusciventris (Velazco et al 2021a); la elevación a especie válida de Neacomys carceleni (Brito et al 2021) y Glossophaga bakeri (Velazco et al 2021); el registro de Pteronotus fuscus en lugar de P. parnelli (Ruelas & Soria 2021), Diclidurus isabella en lugar de D. scutatus (Velazco et al 2021a), Lichonycteris obscura en lugar de L. degener (Zamora-Gutierrez & Ortega 2020) y Holochilus nanus en lugar de H. sciureus (Prado et al 2021); y el retiro de Sturnira luisi (Velazco & Patterson 2013) y de Tamandua mexicana (Ruiz García et al 2021) de la lista, entre otros cambios. Además, cambios nomenclaturales importantes incluyen la propuesta de Dicotyles en reemplazo de Pecari (Acosta et al 2020) y Neogale por Mustela (Patterson et al 2021).…”